Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and advanced

[Lighthammer]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

Canon is whatever YOU precieve it to be. If you want to limit yourself to that, go right on ahead.

Personally, if Mike Okuda is going to sit down and write up a bunch of tech manuals based on designs he did for the show, are YOU really going to sit back and say "Hey Mike Okuda, hey, I like those books you did based on the designs you made for TNG, but you know what, they aren't Canon, because they didn't appear in the show".

Give me a break. Look up the definition of Canon and you'll find the definition states canon is what the end user defines as truisms they consider.

If you want to be that guy who would challenge people like Mike Okuda calling his information akin to fraud because it doesn't meet your definition of canon, go right on ahead, but then I demand you post a youtube video of yourself calling him and properly tagging so he can respond in kind.

Personally, for me, full on licensed material intended to keep the franchise going is good enough for my book of canon. This includes Path to 2409 (the relaunch novels), Star Trek Online and any official material such as tech manuals or Star Trek the Magazine.

The only thing I outright discriminate against is the games pre-Star Trek Online because they make no effort to remain in universe, the non-IGW comics (which I haven't directly followed, but I have read summaries and they do make one heck of an effort to follow Path to 2409) and books pre-Path to 2409 I consider good stories, but I'm never going to lean on them for anything beyond except in a few cases or a few series where they went to extraordinary efforts to remain in univers (IE SCE and Excaliber should probably be considered).

I should ALSO point out if YOU don't support the materials, at least in so far as to acknowledge they exist and acknowledge TPTB are working hard to expand the universe in other formats since CBS is so resistant to putting Star Trek back on the air, all you're doing is hurting the franchise. Each person who says "I don't care about Path to 2409 (the relaunch series)" has essentially said "I don't want anymore Star Trek".

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

Canon is whatever YOU precieve it to be. If you want to limit yourself to that, go right on ahead.

That's head canon. The Trek canon is what's on screen.

Personally, if Mike Okuda is going to sit down and write up a bunch of tech manuals based on designs he did for the show, are YOU really going to sit back and say "Hey Mike Okuda, hey, I like those books you did based on the designs you made for TNG, but you know what, they aren't Canon, because they didn't appear in the show".

Give me a break. Look up the definition of Canon and you'll find the definition states canon is what the end user defines as truisms they consider.

If you want to be that guy who would challenge people like Mike Okuda calling his information akin to fraud because it doesn't meet your definition of canon, go right on ahead, but then I demand you post a youtube video of yourself calling him and properly tagging so he can respond in kind.

It's not calling it fraud at all. Canon and quality are NOT the same thing and shouldn't be mistaken as such! Mike always makes sure to put disclaimers in his books. Take a look at page viii in the Star Trek Chronology for an example:
We hope this chronology will make it easier for Star Trek writers to remain consistant with what's been established to date and for fans to keep track of Star Trek's elaborate back story. We do not, however, want this to intimidate our writer friends or to inhibit the imaginations of fans who may have differing interpretations of the Star Trek timeline. As such, we encourage both fans and writers to take this material with a grain of salt and to enjoy it in the spirit it was intended, as a fun way to explore the Star Trek universe.
As we saw in First Contact, Voyager and Enterprise, subsequent writers used it as a vague guideline, but weren't afraid to move and change things around to suit whatever story they were telling at the time.

Should Shane Johnson (the author of Mr Scott's Guide to the Enterprise) be personally offended that Mike Okuda contradicted many of his assuimptions about Treknology when he wrote the TNG manual? Or should Franz Joseph Schnaubelt (the guy who made the first Enterprise blueprints and Star Fleet Technical Manual in 1975) be upset that Shane and Mike each deviated from what he originally established?

(actually Franz probably would have legit cause to be angry and probably was, since everything from the Federation flag on down is a rip-off of what he designed, slightly modified from his 1975 Technical Manual to avoid paying royalties, but I'm digressing majorly here)

Personally, for me, full on licensed material intended to keep the franchise going is good enough for my book of canon. This includes Path to 2409 (the relaunch novels), Star Trek Online and any official material such as tech manuals or Star Trek the Magazine.

The only thing I outright discriminate against is the games pre-Star Trek Online because they make no effort to remain in universe, the non-IGW comics (which I haven't directly followed, but I have read summaries and they do make one heck of an effort to follow Path to 2409) and books pre-Path to 2409 I consider good stories, but I'm never going to lean on them for anything beyond except in a few cases or a few series where they went to extraordinary efforts to remain in univers (IE SCE and Excaliber should probably be considered).

I should ALSO point out if YOU don't support the materials, at least in so far as to acknowledge they exist and acknowledge TPTB are working hard to expand the universe in other formats since CBS is so resistant to putting Star Trek back on the air, all you're doing is hurting the franchise. Each person who says "I don't care about Path to 2409 (the relaunch series)" has essentially said "I don't want anymore Star Trek".

But why discriminate at all? Why limit yourself to one continuity that you've decided is the "right" one? IMO by doing so you're doing yourself a massive disservice. Look at the new movies, they've taken inspiration from several noncanon sources (most recently Diane Carey's old novel Dreadnought!, just substitute "USS Vengeance" for "USS Star Empire" and Admiral Marcus for Admiral Rittenhouse). Look at other big franchises - I loved Man of Steel and Smallville, despite them being totally separate versions of Superman's backstory. One doesn't have to be "right" while the other is "wrong"

I don't care for the Star Trek Online videogame and it's storyline, but I do love the Trek novelverse. They're each different versions of what might have happened after Star Trek Nemesis. Why does one have to be right and the other wrong any more than the versions of Superman or whatever?

 

[Saturn0660]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

The Galaxy class would mop the floor with the Intrepid class. Not even close.

 

[kgartm1185]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

Canon is whatever YOU precieve it to be. If you want to limit yourself to that, go right on ahead.

Personally, if Mike Okuda is going to sit down and write up a bunch of tech manuals based on designs he did for the show, are YOU really going to sit back and say "Hey Mike Okuda, hey, I like those books you did based on the designs you made for TNG, but you know what, they aren't Canon, because they didn't appear in the show".

Give me a break. Look up the definition of Canon and you'll find the definition states canon is what the end user defines as truisms they consider.

If you want to be that guy who would challenge people like Mike Okuda calling his information akin to fraud because it doesn't meet your definition of canon, go right on ahead, but then I demand you post a youtube video of yourself calling him and properly tagging so he can respond in kind.

Personally, for me, full on licensed material intended to keep the franchise going is good enough for my book of canon. This includes Path to 2409 (the relaunch novels), Star Trek Online and any official material such as tech manuals or Star Trek the Magazine.

The only thing I outright discriminate against is the games pre-Star Trek Online because they make no effort to remain in universe, the non-IGW comics (which I haven't directly followed, but I have read summaries and they do make one heck of an effort to follow Path to 2409) and books pre-Path to 2409 I consider good stories, but I'm never going to lean on them for anything beyond except in a few cases or a few series where they went to extraordinary efforts to remain in univers (IE SCE and Excaliber should probably be considered).

I should ALSO point out if YOU don't support the materials, at least in so far as to acknowledge they exist and acknowledge TPTB are working hard to expand the universe in other formats since CBS is so resistant to putting Star Trek back on the air, all you're doing is hurting the franchise. Each person who says "I don't care about Path to 2409 (the relaunch series)" has essentially said "I don't want anymore Star Trek".

I agree, I get tired of everyone saying that something isn't canon, so it's not true. On the other hand, if canon is what the user wants it to be there would be arguments started about what's canon.

 

[R. Star]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

The flaw in the concept is when you come out with someone else's opinions nicely presented and binded in a book called a "official" tech manual or something of the sort, that's all it is: someone else's opinion that just happens to be published. If you're going to debate the merits of a fictional setting on a tv and movie series, then the only common denominator is the actual presented product: the shows and the movies.

If you start arguing about what is and isn't canon with the supplemental materials, that's when you get into a gray area. Heck the show's creators can't even agree on the subject. Roddenberry cherry picked and declared a lot of things like TAS and some of the movies not to be canon, Berman said everything that appears on screen is. Jeri Taylor said her Voyager novels are canon because she's a producer. If they can't come to any consensus about the supplemental products then how can we? The answer is no... Trek canon is what is presented as the final product. It's the only common bit.

You put an awful lot of words in my mouth in that post of yours Lighthammer, which I don't appreciate one bit. Poor form and kindly don't do it again. If you want to discuss, in a -civilized- fashion what you consider part of your Trek experience go ahead. That's a unique point of view to everyone. But your childish post isn't the way to do it. Heck I agree with you for the most part, and consider many of the novels and games part of my own Trek experience. That doesn't mean it holds any weight in these debates as they are not the core material. They're supplemental and secondary and in the end the opinion of the person who wrote them. It doesn't matter how nicely binded and presented these are, they are just that.. opinions. You're entitled to share them, you're entitled to think they're full of it, you're not entitled to say they're fact despite how pretty they look.

 

[wingsabre]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

The TNG Galaxy will be able to beat the Intrepid if it was a gun fight. It's just too powerful and well armed. However the Intrepid is faster, smaller, more advanced and more maneuverable. It really depends who's the crew behind the ships. Look at TWOK, or TNG:Peak Performance. Additionally, The Galaxy class is still a relatively new class. They got a lot of life out of the Excelsior and Reliant Class ships, and had upgraded them a lot through time. It's reasonable to assume that newer Galaxy class ships will have many of the technological changes seen with the Intrepid class ships. The only fundamental difference would really be size, speed, and power.

 

[Lighthammer]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

The flaw in the concept is when you come out with someone else's opinions nicely presented and binded in a book called a "official" tech manual or something of the sort, that's all it is: someone else's opinion that just happens to be published. If you're going to debate the merits of a fictional setting on a tv and movie series, then the only common denominator is the actual presented product: the shows and the movies.

If you start arguing about what is and isn't canon with the supplemental materials, that's when you get into a gray area. Heck the show's creators can't even agree on the subject. Roddenberry cherry picked and declared a lot of things like TAS and some of the movies not to be canon, Berman said everything that appears on screen is. Jeri Taylor said her Voyager novels are canon because she's a producer. If they can't come to any consensus about the supplemental products then how can we? The answer is no... Trek canon is what is presented as the final product. It's the only common bit.

You put an awful lot of words in my mouth in that post of yours Lighthammer, which I don't appreciate one bit. Poor form and kindly don't do it again. If you want to discuss, in a -civilized- fashion what you consider part of your Trek experience go ahead. That's a unique point of view to everyone. But your childish post isn't the way to do it. Heck I agree with you for the most part, and consider many of the novels and games part of my own Trek experience. That doesn't mean it holds any weight in these debates as they are not the core material. They're supplemental and secondary and in the end the opinion of the person who wrote them. It doesn't matter how nicely binded and presented these are, they are just that.. opinions. You're entitled to share them, you're entitled to think they're full of it, you're not entitled to say they're fact despite how pretty they look.

You muchly did the same calling things not canon.

This is an absolute HOT BUTTON topic for me I get absolutely enamored and outright mad when people say that "I am not accepting X because its not canon".

Think about that the next time you say that. Think about what the dictionary definition of CANON is and DO NOT --- DO NOT use it willy nilly.

Again --- I don't care who you are, every time you say official material isn't canon, unless you're willing to put yourself out on display publicly and say something is NOT CANON and explain rationally why you believe its not, you lost creditably immediately the moment you say "that's not canon".

I hope you enjoyed the lambasting. I'll do it every time someone tries to pull that line. The trek properties deserve noting less then that level of defense.

 

[R. Star]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

Are you mad about splitting hairs or just because some people don't share your opinion?

 

[Guy Gardener]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

The dictionary doesn't give a shit about our definition of canon. I looked through the online urban dictionary, and it went mostly on about the relationship between fanfiction and TV/movie storylines.

 

[Stoo]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

some words SHOUTED in ALLCAPS

Well there needs to be some sort of common ground or this sort of discussion becomes fairly pointless. I've never paid much attention to material outside the TV show and movies, I don't really know if there's any attempt to keep stuff consistent. Does a tech manual contradict a videogame etc. What about mid 90s comic books, are we bringing those in too?

 

[Guy Gardener]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

Did Picard want to shag Pulaski?

Sometimes.

Parallel, incontiguous, dissociative, glancing continuities.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

some words SHOUTED in ALLCAPS

Well there needs to be some sort of common ground or this sort of discussion becomes fairly pointless. I've never paid much attention to material outside the TV show and movies, I don't really know if there's any attempt to keep stuff consistent. Does a tech manual contradict a videogame etc. What about mid 90s comic books, are we bringing those in too?

I challenged Lighthammer's views on canon and didn't even get ALL CAPS. I got nothin'

I don't get how it's a "slap in the face" of Mike Okuda to ignore his idea of Trek's backstory, but OK to "discriminate" against novels and comics. IMO he's slapping those authors in the face just the same, and should call them out about it in the Trek lit forum in the same way he said we have do to poor Mike...

 

[Guy Gardener]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

(I can see you Daniel.)

Okuda was the science-guy (fake-science) on the set.

It should have been up to him for the 20 years he had access to this tv show to mark his territory.

It's his own damn fault if anything he does in a "reference" manual can't be found in a screen capture, of something he mocked together using a caveman version of adobe with ms dos.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

This is an absolute HOT BUTTON topic for me I get absolutely enamored and outright mad when people say that "I am not accepting X because its not canon".

Enamored means you are in love. Infatuated. Smitten.

 

[Takeru]

Re: Intrepid class VS a galaxy class, which was more powerful and adva

Personally, if Mike Okuda is going to sit down and write up a bunch of tech manuals based on designs he did for the show, are YOU really going to sit back and say "Hey Mike Okuda, hey, I like those books you did based on the designs you made for TNG, but you know what, they aren't Canon, because they didn't appear in the show".

Yes, i would say almost exactly that, I love reading about behind the scenes stuff and what people intended to happen or be true but it's not canon.

Give me a break. Look up the definition of Canon and you'll find the definition states canon is what the end user defines as truisms they consider.

So what you're saying is there's no such thing as canon, because if everyone can make up shit or exclude stuff he doesn't like "canon" becomes irrelevant.

If you want to be that guy who would challenge people like Mike Okuda calling his information akin to fraud ...

No one except you is talking about fraud.

I should ALSO point out if YOU don't support the materials, at least in so far as to acknowledge they exist and acknowledge TPTB are working hard to expand the universe in other formats since CBS is so resistant to putting Star Trek back on the air, all you're doing is hurting the franchise. Each person who says "I don't care about Path to 2409 (the relaunch series)" has essentially said "I don't want anymore Star Trek".

That's just ridiculous. As if CBS cares about a few nerds like us reading novels or not when it comes to televised Star Trek.
The novels, games etc. are niche products, they really don't matter and if they ever make a new Star Trek series the writers will ignore and/or contradict them. The most likely scenario is a reboot that even ignores the old shows, so if there is a universe expanding effort that is or isn't supported by a few fans is beyond irrelevant.

And btw, didn't you say I as the end user get to decide what's canon or not and now I'm not allowed to not care about some Path to 2409 novels I've never even heard of? How does that make sense or did you actually mean canon is what YOU as the end user want and we should fall in line and agree with you?